|Publication number||US7127613 B2|
|Application number||US 10/082,385|
|Publication date||Oct 24, 2006|
|Filing date||Feb 25, 2002|
|Priority date||Feb 25, 2002|
|Also published as||US20030163697|
|Publication number||082385, 10082385, US 7127613 B2, US 7127613B2, US-B2-7127613, US7127613 B2, US7127613B2|
|Inventors||Kuldip Singh Pabla, William J. Yeager|
|Original Assignee||Sun Microsystems, Inc.|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Patent Citations (68), Non-Patent Citations (16), Referenced by (161), Classifications (15), Legal Events (4)|
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to peer-to-peer networking, and more particularly to a system and method for the secure exchange of messages and other data between peers in a peer-to-peer environment.
2. Description of the Related Art
The term peer-to-peer (also referred to as P2P) networking may be applied to a wide range of technologies that greatly increase the utilization of information, bandwidth, and computing resources in the Internet. Frequently, these P2P technologies adopt a network-based computing style that neither excludes nor inherently depends on centralized control points. Apart from improving the performance of information discovery, content delivery, and information processing, such a style also can enhance the overall reliability and fault-tolerance of computing systems. The peer-to-peer model may also help to reduce the load on server systems by allowing peers to bypass the server for information, file exchange, and some resource sharing, allowing the servers to perform services which require the specialized hardware and/or software of a “dedicated” server system.
On the Internet, peer-to-peer may refer to a type of transient network that allows a group of computer users (peers) to connect with each other and directly access resources from one another's computer systems. Resources may include, but are not limited to, hardware and software resources such as files, disks, chat messages, applications, and printers, among others. A user must first download and execute the peer-to-peer networking program. After launching the program, the user enters the address (e.g. IP address) of another computer belonging to the network. Once the computer finds another network member on-line, it may connect to that user's connection (who has gotten their IP address from another user's connection and so on). Users may choose how many member connections to seek at one time and determine which resources (e.g. files) they wish to share or password protect. Napster and Gnutella are examples of this kind of peer-to-peer software.
On the Internet, “chat” may refer to two or more users “talking” over the Internet by exchanging messages while using the Internet at the same time. Chatting may involve the exchange of typed-in messages requiring one site as the repository for the messages (or “chat site”) and a group of users who take part from anywhere on the Internet. Chats may be conducted on online services (e.g. America Online), by bulletin board services, and by Web sites, for example. Several Web sites, e.g. Talk City, exist solely for the purpose of conducting chats. Talk City and many other chat sites use a protocol called Internet Relay Chat. Alternatively, some peer-to-peer platforms may provide a mechanism for users to join in a chat session and exchange messages or other data directly without requiring one site as a message repository.
Prior to the development of the peer-to-peer model, computer users' systems connected to the Internet were typically relegated to being clients in a client/server model. When operating in some peer-to-peer models on the Internet or other networks, a peer system may operate outside of the Domain Name System (DNS), and thus may operate independently from the client/server model of the network that may include DNS servers and other servers. In a peer-to-peer network, a peer device or node, which may be referred to simply as a “peer,” may bypass servers to remotely access resources (e.g. files) and information from other peers. Peers in the peer-to-peer network typically may share information and resources with other peers, and may exchange and search for information and resources on a network of users (peers) with common interests. Peers in a peer-to-peer network may also participate in “chat” by exchanging messages.
Public Key/Private Key Encryption
A public key may be defined as a value, provided by some designated, trusted authority, that, combined with a private key derived from the public key (or vice versa), can be used to effectively encrypt and decrypt messages and other data (e.g. files), and that may also be used as a digital signature. A public and private key may be created, in some instances simultaneously, using the same algorithm. A popular algorithm for generating public/private keys is the RSA (Rivest-Shamir-Adleman) algorithm. Other algorithms may also be used, such as TLS (Transport Layer Security). The use of combined public and private keys is known as asymmetric cryptography. Given a private key it is computationally infeasible to determine the public key (and vice-versa).
In a peer-to-peer network, two or more peers may desire to exchange secured messages, for example during a chat session. A peer in a peer-to-peer network may also desire to securely provide resources such as files or other data to one or more other peers. Thus, it may be desirable to provide a method for peers to exchanges messages and/or data, for example using public key/private key encryption. However, since peers in the peer-to-peer network may operate outside of the DNS and independently from the client/server model, typically there is no central server or authority to manage security, specifically public key/private key encryption, for peer groups such as the groups illustrated in
Embodiments may be used to provide secured sessions (e.g. chat sessions) between two peers in a peer-to-peer networking environment. Embodiments may also be used to provide secured group sessions among a plurality of peers. Embodiments may also be used to provide secured transfers of other types of data (e.g. file transfers) between peers. Embodiments may also be used in other environments than peer-to-peer environments, for example, in client-server environments.
Before starting a session (e.g. chat session), two peers may negotiate to determine the terms and conditions for the session. In one embodiment, a public key may be generated on a first peer using a public key generation algorithm. If the first peer wants to have a secured session with a second peer, the first peer may send a message including the public key to the second peer. In one embodiment, the message may be a session request message indicating that a secured session is desired. The second peer may receive the message including the public key. The second peer may then determine if the requested secured session is to be established. In one embodiment, this determination may be made through user input to the network node hosting the second peer. If it is determined that a secured session is to be established, then a session key may be generated from the public key on the second peer using a session key generation mechanism. The generated session key may then be sent to the first peer in a message. In one embodiment, the session key may be encrypted using the public key or otherwise secured when sent to the first peer.
After the first peer receives the session key, the session key may be used by either peer to encrypt messages and/or other data to be sent to the other peer, and to decrypt encrypted messages and other data received from the other peer. Either peer, during the session, may generate a message or other data to be sent to the other peer. An encryption mechanism may be used to encrypt the message or other data using the session key. The encrypted message or other data may then be transmitted to the other peer via the peer-to-peer network. The other peer may receive the encrypted message, or other data and a decryption mechanism may then decrypt the encrypted message or other data to produce the decrypted message or other data using the session key. As no other peers on the peer-to-peer network possess the session key, no other peers can decrypt the messages encrypted using the session key and exchanged between the first and second peer during the session.
The two peers may use the session key for as long as the current session lasts. At some point, the session may be terminated. If, after termination, the two peers negotiate to establish another secured session, then a process similar to the one described above may be performed to generate a new session key that is different from the original session key used in the first session. Thus, in one embodiment, for each secured session established between any two peers in the peer-to-peer network, a new session key is generated. In one embodiment, this may include generating a new public key from which the new session key is generated for each new session. In other embodiments, the public key and/or session key may be saved for use in subsequent sessions.
In one embodiment, if it is determined that a secured session is not to be established, the second peer may send a message to the first peer indicating that the request was not accepted. In one embodiment, the message may include a NULL session key to indicate that a secured session is not to be established.
Peers may participate in a group session. Any number of two or more peers may join in a group session. In one embodiment, each pair of peers in the group session that desires to securely exchange messages and/or other data may generate a unique session key. Thus, each unique pair of peers shares a unique session key. Thus, each unique pair of peers in the group session may exchange secured messages. In one embodiment, a peer in the group session might not require the secure exchange of messages with one or more other peers in the group session. Two peers that do not require secure exchange may still exchange unencrypted messages. Thus, a peer may participate in the group session and not participate in the secure exchange of messages or other data with any other peers, and thus not require a shared session key. In addition, all peers may exchange unencrypted data in addition to encrypted data.
In another embodiment, one session key may be generated and provided to all members in the group session for encrypting and decrypting messages. In one embodiment, one of the peers in the group session may generate a public key, generate the session key from the public key, and provide the session key to other peers in the group session. In one embodiment, the session key may be secured when sending to other peers, for example using public key/private key encryption. Alternatively, one peer may generate a public key and send the public key to another peer in the group session, which may then generate the session key. In one embodiment, not all peers in a group session may require a session key. For example, some peers in a group session may be using secured message exchange with some other peers in the group session but not with other peers in the group session. If a peer is not involved in secured communication with other peers, then the peer may not require a session key. If a new peer joins the group session, the session key may be provided to the new peer if secured communications are desired between member peers of the group session and the new peer. In addition, all peers may exchange unencrypted data in addition to encrypted data.
While the invention is described herein by way of example for several embodiments and illustrative drawings, those skilled in the art will recognize that the invention is not limited to the embodiments or drawings described. It should be understood, that the drawings and detailed description thereto are not intended to limit the invention to the particular form disclosed, but on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the present invention as defined by the appended claims. The headings used herein are for organizational purposes only and are not meant to be used to limit the scope of the description or the claims. As used throughout this application, the word “may” is used in a permissive sense (i.e., meaning having the potential to), rather than the mandatory sense (i.e., meaning must). Similarly, the words “include”, “including”, and “includes” mean including, but not limited to.
A system and method for providing secure exchange of messages between peers in peer groups is described. Embodiments may be used to provide secured sessions (e.g. chat sessions) between two peers in the peer-to-peer network. Embodiments may also be used to provide secured group sessions among a plurality of peers. Embodiments may also be used to provide secured transfers of other types of data (e.g. file transfers) between peers. Embodiments may also be used in other environments than peer-to-peer environments, for example, in client-server environments.
A novel open network computing platform for peer-to-peer networks, which may be referred to as a peer-to-peer platform, is described herein, and the system and method for providing the secure exchanges of messages and other data between peers as described herein may be used in peer-to-peer networking environments based upon the novel peer-to-peer platform.
Peer 300B may receive the message 306 including the public key 304. It may then be determined on peer 300B if the requested secured session is to be established. In one embodiment, this determination may be made through user input to the network node hosting peer 300B. If it is determined that a secured session is to be established, then a session key 310 may be generated on peer 300B from the public key using a session key generation mechanism 308. Embodiments of a session key generation mechanism are described later in this document. The generated session key 310 may then be sent from peer 300B to peer 300A in a message 312. In one embodiment, the message 312 may be encrypted. In one embodiment, the public key 304 generated on peer 300A and sent to peer 300B may be used to encrypt the message 312 on peer 300B. Peer 300A may then use the private key corresponding to the public key to decrypt the encrypted message 312 and thus retrieve the session key 310.
After peer 300A receives the session key 310, the session key 310 may be used by both peers 300 to encrypt messages and other data to be sent to the other peer, and to decrypt encrypted messages and other data received from the other peer. As no other entities on the network have the session key 310, messages encrypted using the session key 310 and exchanged between peer 300A and 300B during the session are secured from other entities on the network. The exchange of encrypted messages between peers is further illustrated in
The peers may use the session key 310 for as long as the current session lasts. At some point, the session may be terminated. If, after termination, the two peers 300A and 300B negotiate to establish another secured session, then a process similar to the one described above may be performed to generate a new session key 310 which is different from the original session key 310 used in the first session. Thus, in one embodiment, for each secured session established between any two peers in the peer-to-peer network, a new session key is generated. In one embodiment, this may include generating a new public key from which the new session key is generated for each new session. Thus, in the unlikely event that some entity on the network manages to “steal” the original session key 310, the stolen session key would be of no use once a new session is established. In other embodiments, the public key and/or session key may be saved for use in subsequent sessions. In one embodiment, for example, the public key may be generated and stored for subsequent sessions. In another embodiment, both the public key and the session key may be generated, used for a session, and stored for subsequent sessions.
In one embodiment, if it is determined that a secured session is not to be established, peer 300B may send a message to peer 300A indicating that the request was not accepted. In one embodiment, the message may include a NULL session key to indicate that a secured session is not to be established. In one embodiment, if it is determined that a secured session is not to be established, the two peers may negotiate to establish an unsecured session. In this embodiment, the two peers participating in the unsecured session may still decide at some point to generate a session key 310 as described above to exchange at least some messages in a secured fashion.
As noted, a plurality of peers may participate in a chat session. In one embodiment, within a peer group, participation of the peers in the chat session is optional, e.g. the peers within the peer group may choose to participate or not to participate in the chat session. All of the peers participating in the chat session receive the same messages, whether secured or unsecured. In one embodiment, if a secured chat session is established, all of the peers in the peer group participating in the secured chat session exchange secured messages. In another embodiment, the peers may exchange both unsecured and secured messages. In one embodiment, if the peers participating in the chat session are part of two or more different groups and/or two or more different subgroups, some of the peers may participate in secured chat and some may participate in unsecured chat.
Any of a variety of methods may be used to generate public keys and session keys. In one embodiment, an RSA (Rivest-Shamir-Adleman) 512-bit public key algorithm may be used, and a RC4 128-bit cipher. RC4 is a variable key-size stream cipher with byte-oriented operations. The algorithm is based on the use of a random permutation. For each session, the initiating peer may generate an RSA public/private key pair, and may send the public key unsigned to the receiving peer, for example, in a session request message. The receiving peer may create a 128-bit session key using a pseudo-random number generator, encrypt in the initiating peer's public key, and send the results back to the initiating peer. The initiating peer may then decrypt the session key with its private key. The session key, now shared by the initiating and receiving peer, may then be used as the session key to encrypt and decrypt messages and other data during the session. In one embodiment, a 1024-bit RSA key may be used.
In another embodiment, TLS (Transport Layer Security) may be used for generating session keys instead of the above method. TLS is a protocol that ensures privacy between two parties, for example communicating applications and their users or peers in a peer-to-peer environment, on the Internet. When two parties communicate, TLS ensures that no third party may eavesdrop or tamper with any message. TLS is composed of two layers: the TLS Record Protocol and the TLS Handshake Protocol. The TLS Record Protocol provides connection security with some encryption method such as the Data Encryption Standard (DES). The TLS Record Protocol can also be used without encryption. The TLS Handshake Protocol allows parties, for example a server and client or alternatively peers in a peer-to-peer network, to authenticate each other and to negotiate an encryption algorithm and cryptographic keys before data is exchanged.
A peer may be implemented in software, hardware or a combination thereof on any of a number of computing devices. These devices may include, but by no means are limited to: personal digital assistants (PDAs), cellular/mobile phones, notebook computers, laptops, desktop computers, workstations, more powerful computer systems such as mainframes and high-end servers, even supercomputers. In addition, a device may host one or more peers simultaneously. The system and method for providing secured peer-to-peer communications as described herein may be implemented on those devices in software, hardware or a combination thereof.
As an example of using the methods as described in
As another example of using the methods as described in
In this example, peer 300A is communicating with peers 300B, 300C and 300D. Thus, peer 300A includes three session keys for encrypting/decrypting messages: 310AB for secure communications with peer 300B, 310AC for peer 300C, and 310AD for peer 300D. Peer 300B is communicating with peers 300A and 300D. Thus, peer 300B includes two session keys for encrypting/decrypting messages: 310AB for secure communications with peer 300B and 310BD for peer 300D. Peer 300C is communicating with peers 300A and 300D. Thus, peer 300C includes two session keys for encrypting/decrypting messages: 310AC for secure communications with peer 300A and 310CD for peer 300D. Peer 300D is communicating with peers 300A, 300B and 300C. Thus, peer 300A includes three session keys for encrypting/decrypting messages: 310AD for secure communications with peer 300A, 310BD for peer 300B, and 310CD for peer 300C.
In this embodiment, unlike the embodiment illustrated in
Note that in various embodiments of group sessions as illustrated in
In one embodiment, the message including the session key 310 may be encrypted prior to sending. The first peer 300 then may decrypt the message to obtain the session key as indicated at 406. In one embodiment, public key/private key encryption may be used. In one embodiment, the public key generated on the first peer and sent to the second peer may be used to encrypt the message on the second peer, and the corresponding private key may be used to decrypt the encrypted message on the first peer. Both peers may store the session key 310 in memory for used during the secured session. The first and second peers 300 then may encrypt and decrypt messages and/or other data such as files using the session key as indicated at 408. Since only the first and second peer 300 have the session key 310, only the first and second peer 300 are able to decrypt messages encrypted using the session key 310.
In one embodiment, a session key 310 may be only used during the session for which it was generated. When the session is terminated, the two peers 300 may dispose of the session key 310. If the two peers later negotiate to participate in another session, a new session key 310 may be generated. In one embodiment, anew public key 304 may be generated for use in generating the new session key 310.
The second peer 300 may receive the message and determine if a secured session is to be established with the first peer 300 as indicated at 424. Determining if a secured session is to be established may be performed by a user of the second peer 300. For example, the request may be displayed on a user interface of the second peer 300, and the user may accept or reject the request through the user interface. Alternatively, the process of determining if a secured session is to be established may be automated.
If it is determined on the second peer 300 that a secured session is to be established, a session key 310 may be generated by the second peer 300 from the public key 304 received from the first peer 300 as indicated at 426. As indicated at 428, the second peer 300 may then send a message to the first peer 300 notifying the first peer 300 that the secured session request is accepted. The message may include the session key 310 generated by the second peer 300. Alternatively, the second peer 300 may send the session key 310 to the first peer 300 in a second message. In one embodiment, the message including the session key 310 may be encrypted. In one embodiment, the public key generated on the first peer and sent to the second peer may be used to encrypt the message on the second peer, and the private key corresponding to the public key may be used to decrypt the encrypted message on the first peer. Both peers may store the session key 310 in memory for used during the secured session. The first and second peers 300 may use the session key to encrypt and decrypt messages and/or other data such as files. Only the first peer 300 and the second peer 300 are able to decrypt messages encrypted using the session key 310 since only they have the session key.
If it is determined on the second peer 300 that a secured session is to be established, the second peer 300 may send a message to the first peer 300 notifying the first peer that the secured session request is rejected as indicated at 442. In one embodiment, a NULL session key 310 may be included in the message to indicate that the secured session request was not accepted. If a secured session is not established, then the two peers may still exchange unencrypted messages or other data in an unsecured session.
The session key 310 may be provided to all peers 310 participating in the secured group session. In one embodiment, the peer that generated the session key 310 may send a public key to each of the peers that are to receive the session key 310 as indicated at 464. The peer may then encrypt the session key using the private key associated with the public key and send the session key to each peer in the session (e.g. in a message) as indicated at 466. Each peer 300 may then decrypt the session key 310 and use the session key 310 to encrypt and decrypt messages and/or other data exchanged with any other peer in the group as indicated at 468. Peers 300 that are not in the group session do not have the session key 310 and thus cannot decrypt messages and/or data transmitted between the peers 300 in the group session. When a peer 300 joins the group session, it may be provided with the session key 310 and thus can participate in the secured group session. Note that peers in the session may still exchange unencrypted messages and other data.
The methods as described in
Embodiments of the system and method for providing secure exchange of messages between peers in peer groups may be implemented in conjunction with a peer-to-peer platform. An exemplary peer-to-peer platform in which embodiments of the system and method is described below. Note that embodiments of the system and method may be integrated in the peer-to-peer platform or alternatively may be an external service that interfaces to the platform to provide the secure exchange of messages between peers on the platform.
Instead of deploying a single set of software (an OS, with its device drivers, and applications) on many hardware platforms, the peer-to-peer platform described herein creates a protocol-based network platform. This approach allows many network nodes to adopt one or more of the protocols of the platform. A “network node” is a node on the network that may participate in (i.e. be a peer in) the peer-to-peer network platform. The peer-to-peer platform may provide infrastructure services for peer-to-peer applications in the peer-to-peer model. The peer-to-peer platform may provide a set of primitives (infrastructure) for use in providing services and/or applications in the peer-to-peer distributed fashion. The peer-to-peer platform may provide mechanisms with which peers may find each other, cooperate with each other, and communicate with each other. Software developers may use the peer-to-peer platform as a standard to deploy inter-operable applications, services and content. Thus, the peer-to-peer platform may provide a base on which to construct peer-to-peer network computing applications on the Internet.
The peer-to-peer platform may provide a mechanism for dynamically creating groups and groups of groups. The peer-to-peer platform may also provide mechanisms for peers to discover (become aware of) other peers and groups, and mechanisms for peers and/or peer groups to establish trust in other peers and/or peer groups 304. The peer-to-peer platform may also provide a mechanism for monitoring peers and peer groups 304, and for metering usage between peers and peer groups 304. The peer-to-peer platform may also provide a mechanism for tracking peers and peer groups 304, and for establishing a control policy between peers and in peer groups 304. The peer-to-peer platform may also provide a security layer for verifying and authorizing peers that wish to connect to other peers or peer groups 304.
In one embodiment, peers (and therefore the entire collective platform of peers) may be defined by:
The peer-to-peer platform protocols may provide inter-operability between compliant software components (executing on potentially heterogeneous peer runtimes). The term compliant may refer to a single protocol or multiple protocols. That is, some peers may not implement all the defined protocols. Furthermore, some peers may only use a portion (client-side or server-side only) of a particular protocol. The protocols defined by the peer-to-peer protocol may be realized over a network. Networks that may support the peer-to-peer platform protocols may include, but are not limited to, wireless and wired networks such as the Internet, a corporate intranet, Local Area Networks (LANs), Wide Area Networks (WANS), and dynamic proximity networks. One or more of the protocols of the peer-to-peer platform may also be used within a single computer. The size and complexity of the network nodes supporting these protocols may range from a simple light switch to a complex, highly available server and even to mainframe and supercomputers.
In one embodiment, the distance, latency, and implementation of peer software is not specified by the peer-to-peer platform protocols, only a common discovery and communication methodology, creating a “black box” effect. The definitions of protocol and peer software implementation issues may be referred to as a binding. A binding may describe how the protocols are bound to an underlying network transport (like TCP/IP or UDP/IP) or to a software platform such as UNIX or Java.
Peers that wish to cooperate and communicate with each other via the peer-to-peer platform may do so by following a set of rules and conventions called a policy. Each policy may orchestrate the use of one or more protocols operating on a set of platform resources. A common policy adopted by peers with different implementations may allow the peers to appear as a single distributed system. The policies may range from tightly-coupled to loosely-coupled policies. Tightly-coupled policies may create tightly-coupled systems. Loosely-coupled policies may create loosely coupled systems. The policies may rely on the set of protocols provided by the peer-to-peer platform. In one embodiment, some policies may be standard and operate in a wide variety of deployments. These standard policies may be referred to as the peer-to-peer platform standard policies. In one embodiment, custom policies may be supported. Policies may offer a means of tailoring the peer-to-peer platform to a problem, using centralized, decentralized, or hybrid approaches where appropriate. In one embodiment, these policies may be made open to all vendors, software developers, and IT managers as a means of adapting peer-to-peer platform to a networking environment and to the problem at hand.
In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform core protocols may be decentralized, enabling peer-to-peer discovery and communication. One embodiment provides standard plug-in policy types that may offer the ability to mix-in centralization as a means of enabling:
In one embodiment, a network node using the peer-to-peer platform (i.e. a peer) may provide one or more advertisement documents. Each advertisement document may represent a resource somewhere on the peer, or even on another device or peer. In one embodiment, all advertisement documents may be defined in a markup language such as XML and therefore may be software platform neutral. Each document may be converted to and from a platform specific representation such as a Java object. The manner in which the conversion takes place may be described in the software platform binding.
In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform may allow software implementation issues to be dealt with by the underlying software platform (e.g. Java, UNIX, or Windows). The combination of standard policies, platform resource advertisements, and flexible binding practices may yield a flexible system that may scale to Internet proportions.
In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform architecture may be defined in terms of its protocols, resource advertisements, and standard policies. The peer-to-peer platform protocols may be realized within various software platforms, such as the Java platform. Network protocol bindings may serve to ensure inter-operability with existing content transfer protocols, network transports, routers, and firewalls. Software platform bindings may describe how protocol stacks are implemented, and how advertisements are converted to and from language constructs (such as objects) that represent the advertised resource (such as a peer group). In one embodiment, the Java platform may be used to create Java-based peer-to-peer platform peers. HTTP is a common reliable content transfer protocol that may be used in the peer-to-peer platform. Other content transfer protocols may also be supported. TCP is a common reliable connection protocol that may be used in the peer-to-peer platform. Other connection protocols may also be supported. UDP is a common Datagram message protocol that may be used in the peer-to-peer platform. Other message protocols may also be supported.
The peer-to-peer platform may mold distinct network nodes called peers into a coherent, yet distributed peer-to-peer network computing platform. In preferred embodiments, the platform may have no single point of configuration, no single point of entry, and no single point of failure. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer network computing platform may be completely decentralized, and may become more robust as it expands through the addition of network nodes. Unlike tightly-coupled systems, the high level of robustness delivered by peer-to-peer platform may be achieved without sacrificing simplicity. The peer-to-peer platform may be a very simple platform that preferably does not rely on high-speed interconnects, complex operating systems, large disk farms, or any other technology on which traditional tightly-coupled systems rely.
Network nodes (called peers) of various kinds may join the platform by implementing one or more of the platform's protocols. Various nodes including, but not limited to, Java, SPARC, x86, PowerPC, and ARM-based nodes may all be placed on an equal footing as “peers”, with no one node type favored over any other node type. Each peer may operate independently of any other peer, providing a degree of reliability not commonly found in tightly-coupled homogeneous systems. Peers may discover each other on the network in order to form loosely-coupled relationships.
Peers may contain software components that act as clients and services that request and provide platform functions respectively. A software component may act as a client, a service, or both. The peer-to-peer platform may recognize different kinds of software components within a peer including, but not limited to:
In one embodiment, peer-to-peer protocols may be embodied as markup language (e.g. XML) messages sent between peer software components acting as clients and services. Peer-to-peer platform messages may define the protocol used to connect the components, and may also be used to address resources offered by the component. The use of policies and messages to define a protocol allows many different kinds of nodes to participate in the protocol. Each node may be free to implement the protocol in a manner best suited to the node's abilities and role(s). For example, not all nodes may be capable of supporting a Java runtime environment; the protocol definition may not require or imply the use of Java on a node.
In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform may use markup language (e.g. XML) messages as a basis for providing Internet-scalable peer-to-peer communication. Each peer's messaging layer may asynchronously deliver an ordered sequence of bytes from client to service, using a networking transport. The messaging layer may maintain the notion (on both client and service) that the sequence of bytes is one atomic unit. In one embodiment, messages are sent to endpoints. An endpoint is a destination (e.g. a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI)) on any networking transport capable of sending and receiving Datagram-style messages. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform does not assume that the networking transport is IP-based. The messaging layer may use the transport specified by the URI to send and receive messages. Both reliable connection-based transports such as TCP/IP and unreliable connectionless transports like UDP/IP may be supported. Other message transports such as IRDA, and emerging transports like Bluetooth may also be supported by using this endpoint addressing scheme.
In one embodiment, peer-to-peer platform messages are Datagrams that may contain an envelope, a stack of protocol headers with bodies, and an optional trailer. In one embodiment, the envelope may contain a header, a message digest, a source endpoint (optional), and destination endpoint. In on embodiment, each protocol header includes a <tag> naming the protocol in use and a body length. In one embodiment, a protocol body may have a variable length amount of bytes that is protocol <tag> dependent. In one embodiment, a protocol body may include one or more credentials used to identify the sender to the receiver. In one embodiment, a variable-length trailer (could be zero) consisting of auditing information may be piggybacked on a message. The trailer size may be computed by subtracting the body size and envelope size from the total size specified in the envelope. In one embodiment, the right to piggyback trailer information may be regulated by the messaging credentials in the message. When an unreliable networking transport is used, each message may be delivered once to the destination, may be delivered more than once to the destination, or may not arrive at the destination. On an unreliable networking transport, messages may arrive at a destination in a different order than sent.
Policies, applications and services layered upon the core protocols are responsible for message reordering, duplicate message removal, and for processing acknowledgement messages that indicate some previously sent message actually arrived at a peer. Regardless of transport, a message may be unicasted (point-to-point) between two peers. Messages may also be broadcasted (like a multicast) to a peer group. In one embodiment, no multicast support in the underlying transport is required.
One embodiment of a peer-to-peer protocol may support credentials in messages. A credential is a key that, when presented in a message body, is used to identify a sender and to verify that sender's right to send the message to the specified endpoint. The credential is an opaque token that may be presented each time a message is sent. The sending address placed in the message envelope may be crosschecked with the sender's identity in the credential. In one embodiment, credentials may be stored in the message body on a per-protocol <tag> basis. In one embodiment, each credential's implementation may be specified as a plug-in policy, which may allow multiple authentication policies to coexist on the same network.
In one embodiment, peer-to-peer platform messages may be defined in a markup language such as XML.
The peer-to-peer platform may provide pipes for information exchange between peers. A pipe encapsulates a message-based protocol and a dynamic set of endpoints. In one embodiment, a pipe requires that the encapsulated protocol be unidirectional, asynchronous, and stateless. Pipes connect one or more peer endpoints. In one embodiment, at each endpoint, software to send or receive, as well as to manage associated queues or buffers, is assumed, but not mandated. These pipe endpoints may be referred to as pipe input and output endpoints. In one embodiment, a pipe may be associated with a group and not with individual peers. Peer communication endpoints (both input and output) may be bound and unbound from a pipe in a dynamic fashion, providing an abstract “in and out” mailbox that is independent of any single peer. When a message is sent into a pipe, the message may be sent to all peer endpoints currently connected (listening) to the pipe. In one embodiment, the set of currently connected endpoints may be obtained using a pipe resolver protocol. In one embodiment, a pipe may offer point-to-point communication. A point-to-point pipe connects two peer endpoints together, i.e. an input endpoint that receives messages sent from the output endpoint. In one embodiment, no reply operation is supported. Additional information in the message payload (like a unique identifier) may be needed to thread message sequences. In one embodiment, a pipe may offer broadcast communication. A broadcast pipe may connect multiple input and output peer endpoints together. Messages flow into the pipe from output endpoints and pass by listening input endpoints. A broadcast message is sent to all listening endpoints simultaneously. This process may actually create multiple copies of the message to be sent. In one embodiment, when peer groups map to underlying physical subnets in a one-to-one fashion, transport multicast may also be used as an implementation optimization provided by pipes.
In a peer-to-peer network platform, peers may cooperate and communicate in peer groups that follow rules and conventions known as policies. Each cooperation or communication policy may be embodied as a named behavior, rule, or convention that may be followed by each member of a peer group. The behavior is typically encapsulated in a body of code packaged, for example, as a dynamic link library (DLL) or Java Archive (JAR) file, but any embodiment is allowed. In one embodiment, a policy name may include a canonical name string and a series of descriptive keywords that uniquely identifies the policy. In order to use a policy, a peer may locate an implementation suitable for the peer's runtime environment. Multiple implementations of the same policy allow Java and other non-native peers to use Java (or other) code implementations, and native peers can use native code implementations. In one embodiment, a standard policy resolver protocol may be used to find active (i.e. running on some peer) and inactive (i.e. not running, but present on some peer) implementations. In one embodiment, once an implementation has been activated, the policy resolver may be used in an ongoing manner to perform Inter-Policy Communication (IPC) without having to create a pipe. Low-level policies, in particular, may need a communication mechanism that does not rely on pipes. The pipe transport policy for example, may not be able to use a pipe to communicate with instances of itself. In one embodiment, policy implementations may be preconfigured into a peer or may be loaded from the network. In one embodiment, the process of finding, downloading and installing a policy implementation from the network may be similar to performing a search on the Internet for a web page, retrieving the page, and then installing the required plug-in. Once a policy is installed and activated, pipes or the policy resolver protocol may be used by the implementation to communicate with all instances of the same policy.
In one embodiment, a policy may have a name that indicates the type and/or purpose of the policy. An optional set of keywords may further describe the policy. In one embodiment, the name and keyword elements may be stored within a markup language (e.g. XML) policy advertisement document. Each policy advertisement document may be embedded in a peer group's advertisement document. In one embodiment, a policy advertisement may provide the policy resolver with only a portion of the search criteria needed to find a suitable implementation. The other information needed to execute a successful policy search may include a peer advertisement. In one embodiment, a peer advertisement may include, but is not limited to, a peer's:
In one embodiment, a peer group may include two or more cooperating peers that adhere to one or more policies. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform does not dictate when, where, or why to create a peer group. The kinds of peer groups found in the platform are determined by the set of policies assigned to those groups. In one embodiment, peers wishing to join a peer group may first locate a current member of the peer group, and then request to join the peer group. The application to join may either be rejected or accepted by one or more of the current members. In one embodiment, membership acceptance policies may enforce a vote, or alternatively may elect one or more designated group representatives to accept or reject new membership applications. The peer-to-peer platform recognizes several motivations for creating or joining peer groups including, but not limited to, communication and content sharing.
One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may provide support for communication and content sharing groups including, but not limited to, the ability to find nearby peers, the ability to find named peers anywhere on the peer-to-peer platform, the ability to find named peer groups anywhere on the peer-to-peer platform, and the ability to find and exchange shared content.
One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may provide a discovery policy that may be used to search for peers, and peer groups 304. The search criteria may include a peer or peer group name (string). One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may provide an authentication policy that may be used to validate, distribute, and authenticate a group member's credentials. The authentication policy may define the type of credential used in the message-based protocols used within the peer group. The authentication policy may be the initial point of connection (like a login) for all new group members.
One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may provide a membership policy that may be used by the current members to reject or accept a new group membership application. Current members may use the membership policy during the login process. One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may provide a content sharing policy that may define the rules for content exchange. Each peer in a group may store content. The sharing policy may encapsulate such behaviors as access, replication, and searching.
One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may provide a policy resolver policy that may be used to execute the implementation search. Once the implementation is activated, the resolver may maintain its name and status within the peer and respond to requests to find active policies. One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may provide a pipe resolver policy that may be used to locate all the peers using (e.g. bound to) a specific pipe.
Network peer groups may be formed based upon the proximity of one peer to another peer. Proximity-based peer groups may serve to subdivide the network into abstract regions. A region may serve as a placeholder for general communication and security policies that deal with existing networking infrastructure, communication scopes and security requirements. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform may include a network peer group discovery protocol that may be used by peers to find network regions and to obtain a region's peer group advertisement document.
As an individual peer boots, it may use the network peer group discovery protocol to determine information including, but not limited to:
The network regions are virtual regions. In other words, their boundaries may or may not reflect any underlying physical network boundaries such as those imposed by routers and firewalls. In one embodiment, the concept of a region may virtualize the notion of routers and firewalls, subdividing the network in a self-organizing fashion without respect to actual physical network boundaries.
Content peer groups may be formed primarily to share resources. Resources may include, but are not limited to, hardware and software resources such as files, services, disks, chat messages, applications, and printers, among others. Content peer groups may include peers from any network peer group, or even peers that do not belong to a network peer group. The rules of sharing content may be determined by the peer group's content sharing policy. Each peer in the content peer group may store a portion of the overall group content. Peers may work together to search, index, and update the collective content. The use of filenames to identify shared content may cause problems including naming collisions. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform addresses this shared content naming problem by letting services and applications use metadata to describe shared content. The metadata may contain much more specific information (e.g. XML-typed information) that may prevent collisions and improve search accuracy. Furthermore, in one embodiment, multiple metadata descriptors (called content advertisements) may be used to identify a single instance of shared content. Allowing multiple advertisements enables applications and services to describe content in a very personal, custom manner that may enable greater search accuracy in any language.
The peer-to-peer platform's security model may be orthogonal to the concepts of peers, policies, peer groups 304, and pipes in the peer-to-peer platform. In one embodiment, security in the peer-to-peer platform may include, but is not limited to:
In one embodiment, all messages may include a network peer group credential that identifies the sender of the message as a full member in good standing. In addition to this low-level communication credential, content peer groups may define membership credentials that define a member's rights, privileges, and role within the group and content access and sharing credentials that define a member's rights to the content stored within the group.
One motivation for grouping peers together is to share content. Types of content items that may be shared include, but are not limited to, files such as text files, structured documents such as PDF and XML files, and active content like a network service. In one embodiment, content may be shared among group members, but not groups, and thus no single item of content may belong to more than one group. In one embodiment, each item of content may have a unique identifier also known as its canonical name. This name may include a peer group universal unique identifier (UUID) and another name that may be computed, parsed, and maintained by peer group members. In one embodiment, the content's name implementation within the peer group is not mandated by the peer-to-peer platform. The name may be a hash code, a URI, or a name generated by any suitable means of uniquely identifying content within a peer group. The entire canonical content name may be referred to as a content identifier.
Each peer group member may share content with other members using a sharing policy that may name or rely on a sharing protocol. The default content sharing protocol may be a standard peer group sharing protocol of the peer-to-peer platform. Higher-level content systems such as file systems and databases may be layered upon the peer group sharing protocol. In on embodiment, the peer group sharing protocol is a standard policy embodied as a core protocol. In one embodiment, higher-level content protocols are optional and may be mandated by a custom policy and not the peer-to-peer platform.
An instance of content may be defined as a copy of an item of content. Each content copy may reside on a different peer in the peer group. The copies may differ in their encoding type. HTML, XML and WML are examples of encoding types. These copies may have the same content identifier, and may even exist on the same peer. An encoding metadata element may be used to differentiate the two copies. Each copy may have the same content identifier as well as a similar set of elements and attributes. Making copies of content on different peers may help any single item of content be more available. For example, if an item has two instances residing on two different peers, only one of the peers needs to be alive and respond to the content request. In one embodiment, whether to copy an item of content may be a policy decision that may be encapsulated in higher-level applications and services.
One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may provide a content management service. A content management service is a non-core (high-level) service that uses the peer group sharing protocol to facilitate content sharing. In one embodiment, the peer group sharing protocol does not mandate sharing policies regarding the replication of content, the tracking of content, metadata content (including indexes), and content relationship graphs (such as a hierarchy). In one embodiment, the content management service may provide these extra features.
Items of content that represent a network service may be referred to as active content. These items may have additional core elements above and beyond the basic elements used for identification and advertisement. Active content items may be recognized by Multi-Purpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) content type and subtype. In one embodiment, all peer-to-peer platform active contents may have the same type. In one embodiment, the subtype of an active content may be defined by network service providers and may be used to imply the additional core elements belonging to active content documents. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform may give latitude to service providers in this regard, yielding many service implementation possibilities. Some typical kinds of elements associated with a network service may include, but are not limited to:
As previously discussed, each peer may have a core protocol stack, a set of policies and one or more services. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform may define a standard service advertisement. In one embodiment, the standard service advertisement may include lifecycle, runtime, and configuration elements.
Some services may be applications. An application may have a user interface element and a storage element in addition to the lifecycle, runtime, and configuration elements. In one embodiment, a service advertisement may also include startup information. The startup information may direct the local core peer software as to how and when to start the service. For example, some services may be marked (in the advertisement) to start at boot, while others may be marked to start when a message arrives in a specific advertised pipe. In one embodiment, services marked to start when a message arrives in a specific advertised pipe may be used to implement daemon services that block in the background awaiting a message to arrive in an input pipe.
In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform recognizes two levels of network services: peer services and peer group services. Each level of service may follow the active content typing and advertisement paradigm, but each level may provide a different degree (level) of reliability. In one embodiment, a peer service may execute on a single peer network node only. If that node happens to fail, the service fails too. This level of service reliability may be acceptable for an embedded device, for example, providing a calendar and email client to a single user. A peer group service, on the other hand, may include a collection of cooperating peer services. If one peer service fails, the collective peer group service may not be affected, because chances are that one or more of the other peer services are healthy. Thus, a peer group service may provide consumers (client peers) a highly reliable, fault-tolerant cluster of identical service implementations, servicing multiple concurrent peer requests. Services of this kind may be defined as content within the peer group. Specific service instances (as represented by service advertisements) may be obtained using the peer information protocol. In one embodiment, peers have the option of contacting a specific service instance using the peer information protocol, or by contacting a group of services through a special active content policy.
One embodiment of the peer-to-peer platform may use advertisements. Advertisements are language-neutral abstract data structures. In one embodiment, advertisements may be defined in a markup language such as XML. In one embodiment, in accordance with a software platform binding, advertisements may be converted to and from native data structures such as Java objects or ‘C’ structs. In one embodiment, each protocol specification may describe one or more request and response message pairs. Advertisements may be documents exchanged in messages. The peer-to-peer platform may defines standard advertisement types including, but not limited to, policy advertisements, peer advertisements, peer group advertisements, pipe advertisements, service advertisements, and content advertisements. In one embodiment, subtypes may be formed from these basic types using schemas (e.g. XML schemas). Subtypes may add extra, richer metadata such as icons. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform protocols, policies, and core software services may operate only on the basic abstract types.
In one embodiment, all peer-to-peer platform advertisements are represented in XML. XML may provide a means of representing data and metadata throughout a distributed system. XML may provide universal (software-platform neutral) data because it may be language agnostic, self-describing, strongly-typed and may ensure correct syntax. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform may use XML for platform resource advertisements and for defining the messages exchanged in the protocol set. Existing content types (MIME) may be described using a level of indirection called metadata. All XML Advertisements may be strongly typed and validated using XML schemas. In one embodiment, only valid XML documents that descend from the base XML advertisement types may be accepted by peers supporting the various protocols requiring that advertisements be exchanged in messages. Another feature of XML is its ability to be translated in to other encodings such as HTML and WML. In one embodiment, this feature of XML may be used to provide support for peers that do not support XML to access advertised resources.
In one embodiment, advertisements may be composed of a series of hierarchically arranged elements. Each element may contain its data and/or additional elements. An element may also have attributes. Attributes may be name-value string pairs. An attribute may be used to store metadata, which may be used to describe the data within the element.
In one embodiment, peer-to-peer platform advertisements may contain elements including, but not limited to:
Peer-to-peer platform advertisements may also contain one or more optional elements including, but not limited to, a resource provider description element and a resource provider security policy element. A resource provider description element may be a standard element that describes the provider of the resource. A resource provider security policy element may be a standard element that describes the provider's security.
A resource provider description element may include, but is not limited to:
For example, a light switch service provider's description element might be:
In one embodiment, the same set of descriptive information (title, provider name, version, and additional info URI) may be used throughout all advertisement types to describe the particular provider.
A resource provider security policy element may include, but is not limited to:
A policy advertisement may describe a behavior, convention, or rule necessary to interact with a platform resource such as a pipe, service, or peer group.
A peer advertisement describes a peer network node within the peer-to-peer platform.
A peer group advertisement describes a collection of cooperating peers.
A pipe advertisement describes an instance of a peer-to-peer communication channel.
A service advertisement describes an instance of peer behavior or protocol.
A content advertisement describes an item of content stored somewhere in a peer group.
An item of content's data may be encoded “by value.” In other words, the item contains an in-line document that holds the content's data. Alternatively, an item of content's data may be encoded “by reference.” In other words, the item contains a URI referencing the actual document holding the data. A size element may be provided for items of content. In one embodiment, the size is the total size of the content in bytes. In one embodiment, the size is a long (unsigned 64-bits).
The “size”, “by-value” and “by-reference” elements are three kinds of elements that may be stored in a content advertisement document. An unlimited number of other types of elements may be added to a content advertisement. An item of content may also contain elements including, but not limited to:
Other embodiments may include other networking protocols, and/or may not include some of the protocols described in this embodiment.
As illustrated in
In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform may provide different levels of security. The system and method for providing secure exchange of messages between peers in peer groups as described herein may be implemented as part of the security model of the peer-to-peer platform or may be implemented separately and work in conjunction with the security model to provide the secure exchange of data, including messages and other data such as files, between peers operating in the peer-to-peer environment provided by the peer-to-peer platform.
In one embodiment, APIs may be provided to access well known security mechanisms such as RSA. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer platform may provide a distributed security mechanism in a peer-to-peer environment. In one embodiment, this distributed security may not depend on certificates administered by a central authority. The distributed security mechanism may allow a peer group “web of trust” to be generated. In the distributed security mechanism, peers may serve as certificate authorities (security peers). Each peer group may include one or more peers that may serve as a certificate authority in the group. In one embodiment, the creator of a peer group may become the default security authority in the group. In one embodiment, if there is more than one creator, the creator peers may choose one of the peers to be the security authority in the group. In one embodiment, the peer or peers that create a peer group may define the security methods that are to be used within the group (anywhere from no security to high levels of security). In one embodiment, more than one peer in a peer group may serve as a security peer. Since peers are not guaranteed to be up at all times, having multiple security peers in a peer group may help insure that at least one security peer is available at all times. In one embodiment, the peer group's certificate peer may verify keys to provide a weak level of trust. In one embodiment, peer-to-peer platform advertisements may include information to describe the security mechanism(s) to be used in a peer group. For example, the advertisement may include information to do public key exchange, information to indicate what algorithms are to be used, etc. The advertisement may also include information that may be used to enforce secure information exchange on pipes (e.g. encryption information).
In one embodiment, peer group security may establish a “social contract”. The role of security is distributed across peer groups, and across members of peer groups, that all agree to participate by the rules. A peer group may establish the set of rules by which security in the group is enforced. A peer may join the peer group with a low level of security clearance (low trust). If the peer stays in the group and behaves (follows the rules), the peer may build up its level of trust within the group, and may eventually be moved up in its security level. Within peer groups operating under a social contract, certificates and/or public keys may be exchanged without the participation of a strict certificate authority; i.e. the members may exchange certificates based upon their trust in each other. In one embodiment, a peer group may use an outside challenge (e.g. a secret group password) that may be encrypted/decrypted with public/private keys, as a method to protect and verify messages within the group. In one embodiment, peer groups may be configured to use other types of security, including a high level of security, for example using a strict certificate authority, and even no security. In one embodiment, peer-to-peer platform messages exchanged within a group may have a “placeholder” for security credentials. This placeholder may be used for different types of credentials, depending upon the security implementation of the particular group. In one embodiment, all peer-to-peer messages within the group may be required to have the embedded credential.
Various embodiments may further include receiving, sending or storing instructions and/or data implemented in accordance with the foregoing description upon a carrier medium. Generally speaking, a carrier medium may include storage media or memory media such as magnetic or optical media, e.g., disk or CD-ROM, volatile or non-volatile media such as RAM (e.g. SDRAM, DDR SDRAM, RDRAM, SRAM, etc.), ROM, etc. as well as transmission media or signals such as electrical, electromagnetic, or digital signals, conveyed via a communication medium such as network and/or a wireless link.
In summary, a system and method for providing secured peer-to-peer chat in a peer-to-peer environment have been disclosed. It will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill having the benefit of this disclosure that the illustrative embodiments described above are capable of numerous variations without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. Various modifications and changes may be made as would be obvious to a person skilled in the art having the benefit of this disclosure. It is intended that the following claims be interpreted to embrace all such modifications and changes and, accordingly, the specifications and drawings are to be regarded in an illustrative rather than a restrictive sense.
|Cited Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US5220657||Apr 15, 1991||Jun 15, 1993||Xerox Corporation||Updating local copy of shared data in a collaborative system|
|US5479514 *||Feb 23, 1994||Dec 26, 1995||International Business Machines Corporation||Method and apparatus for encrypted communication in data networks|
|US5619657||Jun 6, 1994||Apr 8, 1997||Digital Equipment Corporation||Method for providing a security facility for a network of management servers utilizing a database of trust relations to verify mutual trust relations between management servers|
|US5627892||Apr 19, 1995||May 6, 1997||General Instrument Corporation Of Delaware||Data security scheme for point-to-point communication sessions|
|US5671428||Aug 28, 1992||Sep 23, 1997||Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba||Collaborative document processing system with version and comment management|
|US5745574||Dec 15, 1995||Apr 28, 1998||Entegrity Solutions Corporation||Security infrastructure for electronic transactions|
|US5812793||Jun 26, 1996||Sep 22, 1998||Microsoft Corporation||System and method for asynchronous store and forward data replication|
|US5832514||Jun 26, 1996||Nov 3, 1998||Microsoft Corporation||System and method for discovery based data recovery in a store and forward replication process|
|US5896503||Jul 23, 1996||Apr 20, 1999||International Business Machines Corporation||Managing membership of a domain of processors in a distributed computing environment|
|US5987446||Nov 12, 1996||Nov 16, 1999||U.S. West, Inc.||Searching large collections of text using multiple search engines concurrently|
|US5995951||Jun 4, 1996||Nov 30, 1999||Recipio||Network collaboration method and apparatus|
|US6029192||Mar 14, 1997||Feb 22, 2000||At&T Corp.||System and method for locating resources on a network using resource evaluations derived from electronic messages|
|US6067551||Nov 14, 1997||May 23, 2000||Microsoft Corporation||Computer implemented method for simultaneous multi-user editing of a document|
|US6078914||Dec 9, 1996||Jun 20, 2000||Open Text Corporation||Natural language meta-search system and method|
|US6134550||Mar 18, 1998||Oct 17, 2000||Entrust Technologies Limited||Method and apparatus for use in determining validity of a certificate in a communication system employing trusted paths|
|US6182136||Sep 8, 1998||Jan 30, 2001||Hewlett-Packard Company||Automated service elements discovery using core service specific discovery templates|
|US6233601||Nov 13, 1997||May 15, 2001||Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories, Inc.||Itinerary based agent mobility including mobility of executable code|
|US6269099||Jul 1, 1998||Jul 31, 2001||3Com Corporation||Protocol and method for peer network device discovery|
|US6446113||Jul 19, 1999||Sep 3, 2002||Groove Networks, Inc.||Method and apparatus for activity-based collaboration by a computer system equipped with a dynamics manager|
|US6473761||Mar 26, 1999||Oct 29, 2002||Omron Corporation||Agent system|
|US6584493||Sep 14, 1999||Jun 24, 2003||Microsoft Corporation||Multiparty conferencing and collaboration system utilizing a per-host model command, control and communication structure|
|US6611872||Jun 1, 1999||Aug 26, 2003||Fastforward Networks, Inc.||Performing multicast communication in computer networks by using overlay routing|
|US6657116||Jun 29, 2000||Dec 2, 2003||Microsoft Corporation||Method and apparatus for scheduling music for specific listeners|
|US6658540||Mar 31, 2000||Dec 2, 2003||Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.||Method for transaction command ordering in a remote data replication system|
|US6671746||Dec 14, 1998||Dec 30, 2003||Charles J. Northrup||Execution of application process using registry having binding methods|
|US6681282||Aug 31, 2000||Jan 20, 2004||Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.||Online control of a multiprocessor computer system|
|US6687878||Mar 15, 1999||Feb 3, 2004||Real Time Image Ltd.||Synchronizing/updating local client notes with annotations previously made by other clients in a notes database|
|US6697944||Oct 1, 1999||Feb 24, 2004||Microsoft Corporation||Digital content distribution, transmission and protection system and method, and portable device for use therewith|
|US6810259||Dec 14, 2000||Oct 26, 2004||Utstarcom Inc.||Location update protocol|
|US6854016||Jun 19, 2000||Feb 8, 2005||International Business Machines Corporation||System and method for a web based trust model governing delivery of services and programs|
|US6892230||Feb 1, 2000||May 10, 2005||Microsoft Corporation||Dynamic self-configuration for ad hoc peer networking using mark-up language formated description messages|
|US6938095||Mar 21, 2002||Aug 30, 2005||Pluris, Inc.||Method and apparatus for establishing and sharing a virtual change notification list among a plurality of peer nodes|
|US6963867||Mar 31, 2003||Nov 8, 2005||A9.Com, Inc.||Search query processing to provide category-ranked presentation of search results|
|US20020027567||Apr 3, 2001||Mar 7, 2002||Niamir Bern B.||Listing network for classified information|
|US20020052885||Sep 11, 2001||May 2, 2002||Levy Kenneth L.||Using embedded data with file sharing|
|US20020062375||Sep 13, 2001||May 23, 2002||Dan Teodosiu||Locator and tracking service for peer to peer resources|
|US20020065848||Aug 21, 2001||May 30, 2002||Richard Walker||Simultaneous multi-user document editing system|
|US20020071099||Nov 30, 2000||Jun 13, 2002||Eastman Kodak Company||Motion picture film projector illumination system for minimizing film buckle|
|US20020073075||Dec 7, 2000||Jun 13, 2002||Ibm Corporation||Method and system for augmenting web-indexed search engine results with peer-to-peer search results|
|US20020073204||Dec 7, 2000||Jun 13, 2002||Rabindranath Dutta||Method and system for exchange of node characteristics for DATA sharing in peer-to-peer DATA networks|
|US20020138471||Mar 26, 2001||Sep 26, 2002||International Business Machines Corporation||Method and system for operating a rating server based on usage and download patterns within a peer-to-peer network|
|US20020138576||Sep 26, 2001||Sep 26, 2002||Schleicher Jorg Gregor||Method and system for generating revenue in a peer-to-peer file delivery network|
|US20020184311||Jan 22, 2002||Dec 5, 2002||Traversat Bernard A.||Peer-to-peer network computing platform|
|US20030009570 *||Jul 3, 2001||Jan 9, 2003||International Business Machines Corporation||Method and apparatus for segmented peer-to-peer computing|
|US20030009660||Jul 9, 2001||Jan 9, 2003||Walker Mark R.||Method and ystem for establishing and bridging of semi-private peer networks|
|US20030028585||Jun 7, 2002||Feb 6, 2003||Yeager William J.||Distributed trust mechanism for decentralized networks|
|US20030055892||Sep 19, 2001||Mar 20, 2003||Microsoft Corporation||Peer-to-peer group management and method for maintaining peer-to-peer graphs|
|US20030055894||Jun 7, 2002||Mar 20, 2003||Yeager William J.||Representing trust in distributed peer-to-peer networks|
|US20030055898||Jun 7, 2002||Mar 20, 2003||Yeager William J.||Propagating and updating trust relationships in distributed peer-to-peer networks|
|US20030056093 *||Sep 19, 2001||Mar 20, 2003||Microsoft Corporation||Peer-to-peer name resolution protocol (PNRP) group security infrastructure and method|
|US20030061287||May 31, 2002||Mar 27, 2003||Chee Yu||Method and system for delivering files in digital file marketplace|
|US20030070070||Jun 7, 2002||Apr 10, 2003||Yeager William J.||Trust spectrum for certificate distribution in distributed peer-to-peer networks|
|US20030105812||Aug 7, 2002||Jun 5, 2003||Gigamedia Access Corporation||Hybrid system architecture for secure peer-to-peer-communications|
|US20030115251 *||Feb 13, 2002||Jun 19, 2003||Fredrickson Jason A.||Peer data protocol|
|US20030152034||Feb 1, 2002||Aug 14, 2003||Microsoft Corporation||Peer-to-peer method of quality of service (Qos) probing and analysis and infrastructure employing same|
|US20030191828||Apr 9, 2002||Oct 9, 2003||Ramanathan Murali Krishna||Interest-based connections in peer-to-peer networks|
|US20030191933||Apr 3, 2002||Oct 9, 2003||Zhichen Xu||Invoking mutual anonymity by electing to become head of a return path|
|US20030206638||May 1, 2002||Nov 6, 2003||Zhichen Xu||Increasing peer privacy by forwarding a label|
|US20030212804||May 9, 2002||Nov 13, 2003||Ardeshir Hashemi||Method and apparatus for media clip sharing over a network|
|US20040006586||Apr 22, 2003||Jan 8, 2004||Secure Resolutions, Inc.||Distributed server software distribution|
|US20040019514||Oct 4, 2002||Jan 29, 2004||Sun Microsystems, Inc., A Delaware Corporation||Submitting and monitoring jobs in peer-to-peer distributed computing|
|US20040039781||Aug 16, 2002||Feb 26, 2004||Lavallee David Anthony||Peer-to-peer content sharing method and system|
|US20040088348||Oct 31, 2002||May 6, 2004||Yeager William J.||Managing distribution of content using mobile agents in peer-topeer networks|
|US20040088369||Oct 31, 2002||May 6, 2004||Yeager William J.||Peer trust evaluation using mobile agents in peer-to-peer networks|
|US20040088646||Oct 31, 2002||May 6, 2004||Yeager William J.||Collaborative content coherence using mobile agents in peer-to-peer networks|
|US20040133640||Oct 31, 2002||Jul 8, 2004||Yeager William J.||Presence detection using mobile agents in peer-to-peer networks|
|US20050086300||Jun 7, 2002||Apr 21, 2005||Yeager William J.||Trust mechanism for a peer-to-peer network computing platform|
|US20050251539||Jul 18, 2005||Nov 10, 2005||Parekh Sanjay M||Systems and methods for determining, collecting, and using geographic locations of internet users|
|1||"Frequently Asked Questions about PGPi," http://web.archive.org/web/20020207220715/http://stale.schumacher.no/email.shtml, Mar. 2, 2001, (9 pages).|
|2||"JXTA v1.0 Protocols Specification," Sun Microsystems, Inc., 2002, (86 pages).|
|3||"LICQ Info," http://web.archive.org/web/20010808110229/www.licq.org/info.html, Aug. 8, 2001, 4 pages.|
|4||"Project JXTA: An Open, Innovative Collaboration," Sun Microsystems, Inc., Apr. 25, 2001, (7 pages).|
|5||Abdul-Rahman et al., "A Distributed Trust Model," 1997 New Security Paradigms Workshop, ACM 1998, (pp. 48-59).|
|6||Alan Beecraft, "Peer-to-Peer: From JMS to Project JXTA Part1: Shall we Chat?," http://java.sun.com/developer/technical/articles/peer/, Nov. 2001, 5 pages.|
|7||Bill Yeager, "Self Constructing P2P Networks Using the Project JXTA P2P Protocols," http://netseminar.stanford.edu/sessions/2002-03-14.html, Mar. 14, 2002, (2 pages).|
|8||Cameron Ross Dunne, "Using Mobile Agents for Network Resource Discovery in Peer-to-Peer Networks," http://www.acm.org/sigs/sigecom/exchanges/volume<SUB>-</SUB>2<SUB>-</SUB>(01)/2.3-index.html, 2001, (11 pages).|
|9||Fung et al., "Part-Time MSC Project 1 Mid-Term Review report," Peer-to-Peer Networks & Mobile Agents, Oct. 31, 2001, (12 pages).|
|10||Ku, et al., "An Intelligent Mobile Agent Framework for Distributed Network Management," IEEE, 1997, pp. 160164.|
|11||Lange et al., "Mobile Agents with Java: The Aglet API," World Wide Web, vol. 1, Issue 3, 1998, (pp. 111-121).|
|12||Oram, "Peer-to-Peer: Harnessing the Benefits of a Disruptive Technology," Mar. 2001, O'Reilly & Associates, First Edition, Chapters 16 and 18.|
|13||Oshima et al., "Aglets Specification 1.1 Draft," Sun Microsystems, Sep. 8, 1998, (40 pages).|
|14||Sniffen, "Trust Economies in the Free Haven Project," May 22, 2000, pp. 1-38.|
|15||Traversat et al., "Project JXTA Virtual Network," Sun Microsystems, Inc., Feb. 5, 2002, (10 pages).|
|16||Zacharia et al., "Trust Management Through Reputation Mechanisms," Applied Artificial Intelligence, 2000, 14:881-907.|
|Citing Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US7290280 *||Apr 8, 2002||Oct 30, 2007||Sun Microsystems, Inc.||Method and apparatus to facilitate virtual transport layer security on a virtual network|
|US7363378||Jul 1, 2003||Apr 22, 2008||Microsoft Corporation||Transport system for instant messaging|
|US7392375 *||Sep 18, 2002||Jun 24, 2008||Colligo Networks, Inc.||Peer-to-peer authentication for real-time collaboration|
|US7433700 *||Nov 12, 2004||Oct 7, 2008||Microsoft Corporation||Strategies for peer-to-peer instant messaging|
|US7434220 *||Sep 15, 2003||Oct 7, 2008||Clearcube Technology, Inc.||Distributed computing infrastructure including autonomous intelligent management system|
|US7441037||Mar 21, 2006||Oct 21, 2008||Microsoft Corporation||Authorization access controlled content exchange|
|US7441141||Nov 22, 2004||Oct 21, 2008||Avaya Canada Corp.||Back up of network devices|
|US7444413 *||Jun 26, 2002||Oct 28, 2008||Microsoft Corporation||Authorization access controlled content exchange|
|US7480722 *||Mar 12, 2002||Jan 20, 2009||Sony Corporation||Information processing apparatus and method, recording medium product, and program|
|US7516191||Mar 30, 2001||Apr 7, 2009||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||System and method for invocation of services|
|US7529255||Apr 21, 2005||May 5, 2009||Microsoft Corporation||Peer-to-peer multicasting using multiple transport protocols|
|US7536471 *||Apr 1, 2004||May 19, 2009||Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.||Use of nodes to monitor or manage peer to peer networks|
|US7567987 *||Oct 24, 2003||Jul 28, 2009||Microsoft Corporation||File sharing in P2P group shared spaces|
|US7580510 *||Jun 21, 2005||Aug 25, 2009||Avaya, Inc.||Peer to peer voice over IP network with distributed call processing|
|US7590685||Apr 7, 2004||Sep 15, 2009||Salesforce.Com Inc.||Techniques for providing interoperability as a service|
|US7596690 *||Sep 9, 2004||Sep 29, 2009||International Business Machines Corporation||Peer-to-peer communications|
|US7610505 *||Jan 24, 2008||Oct 27, 2009||Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc.||Violations in a peer-to-peer relay network|
|US7689711||Mar 30, 2001||Mar 30, 2010||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||System and method for routing messages between applications|
|US7706540 *||Jan 31, 2006||Apr 27, 2010||Entriq, Inc.||Content distribution using set of session keys|
|US7721093 *||Apr 2, 2004||May 18, 2010||Microsoft Corporation||Authenticated exchange of public information using electronic mail|
|US7721328||Dec 14, 2004||May 18, 2010||Salesforce.Com Inc.||Application identity design|
|US7739351||Mar 23, 2004||Jun 15, 2010||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Synchronous interface to asynchronous processes|
|US7751537||Dec 22, 2003||Jul 6, 2010||Avaya Canada Corp.||Peer to peer voice over IP network with distributed call processing|
|US7788399||Mar 30, 2001||Aug 31, 2010||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||System and method for mapping of services|
|US7822980 *||Aug 29, 2006||Oct 26, 2010||International Business Machines Corporation||Authenticated identity propagation and translation within a multiple computing unit environment|
|US7877353 *||Dec 28, 2006||Jan 25, 2011||Ebay Inc.||Peer-to-peer trading platform with relative reputation-based item search and buddy rating|
|US7904488 *||Jul 21, 2004||Mar 8, 2011||Rockwell Automation Technologies, Inc.||Time stamp methods for unified plant model|
|US7904882||Sep 27, 2004||Mar 8, 2011||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Managing virtual business instances within a computer network|
|US7958019||Dec 28, 2006||Jun 7, 2011||Ebay Inc.||Peer-to-peer trading platform with roles-based transactions|
|US7975140 *||Jan 5, 2006||Jul 5, 2011||Nortel Networks Limited||Key negotiation and management for third party access to a secure communication session|
|US7979913 *||Dec 1, 2004||Jul 12, 2011||Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.||Home network system and method therefor|
|US7991697||Jan 11, 2008||Aug 2, 2011||Irdeto Usa, Inc.||Method and system to digitally sign and deliver content in a geographically controlled manner via a network|
|US7995478||May 30, 2007||Aug 9, 2011||Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.||Network communication with path MTU size discovery|
|US8005957||Dec 21, 2010||Aug 23, 2011||Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.||Network traffic prioritization|
|US8015300||Oct 22, 2010||Sep 6, 2011||Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.||Traversal of symmetric network address translator for multiple simultaneous connections|
|US8015614 *||Jun 9, 2006||Sep 6, 2011||Panasonic Corporation||Information security device|
|US8041032 *||Aug 19, 2005||Oct 18, 2011||Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc.||Symmetric key encryption system with synchronously updating expanded key|
|US8060626||Sep 22, 2008||Nov 15, 2011||Sony Computer Entertainment America Llc.||Method for host selection based on discovered NAT type|
|US8060855 *||Oct 9, 2007||Nov 15, 2011||Microsoft Corporation||Artifact sharing from a development environment|
|US8086847 *||Jul 13, 2009||Dec 27, 2011||International Business Machines Corporation||Computer program product and computer system for peer-to-peer communications|
|US8099598 *||Jan 3, 2005||Jan 17, 2012||Gary Gang Liu||Secure messaging system with automatic recipient enrollment|
|US8103749 *||Jan 5, 2006||Jan 24, 2012||Yissum Research Development Company Of The Hebrew University Of Jerusalem||Method and apparatus for managing communications|
|US8108919||Apr 2, 2010||Jan 31, 2012||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Application identity design|
|US8166547 *||Sep 6, 2005||Apr 24, 2012||Fortinet, Inc.||Method, apparatus, signals, and medium for managing a transfer of data in a data network|
|US8171123||Nov 7, 2008||May 1, 2012||Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.||Network bandwidth detection and distribution|
|US8185635||Apr 21, 2008||May 22, 2012||Microsoft Corporation||Transport system for instant messaging|
|US8224985||Oct 4, 2005||Jul 17, 2012||Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.||Peer-to-peer communication traversing symmetric network address translators|
|US8260849||May 10, 2010||Sep 4, 2012||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Synchronous interface to asynchronous processes|
|US8296558 *||Nov 26, 2003||Oct 23, 2012||Apple Inc.||Method and apparatus for securing communication between a mobile node and a network|
|US8316364 *||Feb 28, 2007||Nov 20, 2012||Red Hat, Inc.||Peer-to-peer software update distribution network|
|US8335822||Dec 28, 2006||Dec 18, 2012||Ebay Inc.||Peer-to-peer trading platform with search caching|
|US8370425 *||Oct 9, 2008||Feb 5, 2013||Microsoft Corporation||Transient networks|
|US8453196 *||Jun 1, 2004||May 28, 2013||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Policy management in an interoperability network|
|US8457034||Jun 10, 2009||Jun 4, 2013||Raytheon Company||Airborne communication network|
|US8458776||Oct 21, 2009||Jun 4, 2013||Microsoft Corporation||Low-latency peer session establishment|
|US8472629 *||Mar 7, 2007||Jun 25, 2013||Canon Kabushiki Kaisha||Communication system, communication device and processing method therefor|
|US8478818||Jul 31, 2012||Jul 2, 2013||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Synchronous interface to asynchronous processes|
|US8639843||Aug 28, 2012||Jan 28, 2014||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||System and method for routing messages between applications|
|US8681993 *||Feb 20, 2009||Mar 25, 2014||Certicom Corp.||Local area network|
|US8769281||Sep 19, 2012||Jul 1, 2014||Apple Inc.||Method and apparatus for securing communication between a mobile node and a network|
|US8775654||Dec 19, 2003||Jul 8, 2014||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Apparatus and methods for mediating messages|
|US8788821||Sep 19, 2012||Jul 22, 2014||Apple Inc.||Method and apparatus for securing communication between a mobile node and a network|
|US8818334 *||Nov 19, 2008||Aug 26, 2014||Motorola Mobility Llc||Secure data exchange with identity information exchange|
|US8837718||Mar 27, 2009||Sep 16, 2014||Microsoft Corporation||User-specified sharing of data via policy and/or inference from a hierarchical cryptographic store|
|US8838833||Apr 2, 2010||Sep 16, 2014||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Providing on-demand access to services in a wide area network|
|US8909777||Dec 7, 2010||Dec 9, 2014||Intel Corporation||Systems and methods for dynamic access to program features|
|US8930536 *||Mar 16, 2006||Jan 6, 2015||Adaptive Computing Enterprises, Inc.||Virtual private cluster|
|US8930545||Sep 1, 2011||Jan 6, 2015||Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.||Traversal of symmetric network address translator for multiple simultaneous connections|
|US8938509 *||Oct 6, 2010||Jan 20, 2015||Qualcomm Incorporated||Methods and apparatus for supporting sharing of privileges in a peer to peer system|
|US8943206||Apr 30, 2012||Jan 27, 2015||Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.||Network bandwidth detection and distribution|
|US8949338||Dec 28, 2006||Feb 3, 2015||Ebay Inc.||Peer-to-peer trading platform|
|US9032023||Apr 9, 2013||May 12, 2015||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Synchronous interface to asynchronous processes|
|US9037726||Jul 5, 2007||May 19, 2015||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Apparatus and methods for managing messages sent between services|
|US9118719||Sep 30, 2011||Aug 25, 2015||Fortinet, Inc.||Method, apparatus, signals, and medium for managing transfer of data in a data network|
|US9152985 *||Dec 21, 2011||Oct 6, 2015||Sony Corporation||System and method for encrypting and rewarding users for sharing streaming media between mobile devices over an ad-hoc network|
|US9202045 *||Nov 6, 2006||Dec 1, 2015||Koninklijke Philips N.V.||System for managing access control|
|US9225663||May 5, 2015||Dec 29, 2015||Adaptive Computing Enterprises, Inc.||System and method providing a virtual private cluster|
|US9338214||Jan 31, 2011||May 10, 2016||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Managing virtual business instances within a computer network|
|US9356778||Feb 10, 2014||May 31, 2016||Certicom Corp.||Secured communication for local area network|
|US9450946||Jun 29, 2015||Sep 20, 2016||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Secure identity federation for non-federated systems|
|US9467285 *||Sep 7, 2010||Oct 11, 2016||Nokia Technologies Oy||Security of a multimedia stream|
|US9467405||Jul 21, 2015||Oct 11, 2016||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Routing messages between applications|
|US9473536||Feb 23, 2015||Oct 18, 2016||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Method, system, and computer program product for facilitating communication in an interoperability network|
|US9491126||Jul 21, 2015||Nov 8, 2016||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Routing messages between applications|
|US9588828||Jan 27, 2014||Mar 7, 2017||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||System and method for routing messages between applications|
|US9645712||Dec 15, 2004||May 9, 2017||Grand Central Communications, Inc.||Multiple stakeholders for a single business process|
|US9674226||Apr 14, 2015||Jun 6, 2017||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Synchronous interface to asynchronous processes|
|US9729655||Mar 17, 2016||Aug 8, 2017||Fortinet, Inc.||Managing transfer of data in a data network|
|US9800586||Sep 16, 2016||Oct 24, 2017||Salesforce.Com, Inc.||Secure identity federation for non-federated systems|
|US9854016||Dec 17, 2014||Dec 26, 2017||Intel Corporation||Systems and methods for dynamic access to program features|
|US20030018808 *||Mar 30, 2001||Jan 23, 2003||Lev Brouk||System and method for mapping of services|
|US20030041178 *||Mar 30, 2001||Feb 27, 2003||Lev Brouk||System and method for routing messages between applications|
|US20030046402 *||Mar 12, 2002||Mar 6, 2003||Sony Corporation||Information processing apparatus and method, recording medium product, and program|
|US20030053459 *||Mar 30, 2001||Mar 20, 2003||Lev Brouk||System and method for invocation of services|
|US20030191965 *||Apr 8, 2002||Oct 9, 2003||Yeager William J.||Method and apparatus to facilitate virtual transport layer security on a virtual network|
|US20030212804 *||May 9, 2002||Nov 13, 2003||Ardeshir Hashemi||Method and apparatus for media clip sharing over a network|
|US20030229705 *||May 29, 2003||Dec 11, 2003||Matsuno Yohichiroh||Computer networking system, method of document retrieval in document management system, document management program and media for document management|
|US20030235309 *||Mar 10, 2003||Dec 25, 2003||Marinus Struik||Local area network|
|US20040024886 *||Jun 26, 2002||Feb 5, 2004||Parichay Saxena||Authorization access controlled content exchange|
|US20040054885 *||Sep 18, 2002||Mar 18, 2004||Bartram Linda Ruth||Peer-to-peer authentication for real-time collaboration|
|US20040107420 *||Sep 15, 2003||Jun 3, 2004||Husain Syed Mohammad Amir||Distributed computing infrastructure including autonomous intelligent management system|
|US20040153411 *||Jan 16, 2004||Aug 5, 2004||Canon Europa N.V.||Method and device for transferring secure information|
|US20040156485 *||Dec 22, 2003||Aug 12, 2004||Behrouz Poustchi||Voice mail system, method and network devices|
|US20050005014 *||Jul 1, 2003||Jan 6, 2005||John Holmes||Transport system for instant messaging|
|US20050052999 *||Apr 1, 2004||Mar 10, 2005||Oliver Huw Edward||Use of nodes to monitor or manage peer to peer networks|
|US20050053000 *||Apr 1, 2004||Mar 10, 2005||Oliver Huw Edward||Use of nodes to monitor or manage peer to peer networks|
|US20050080914 *||Jun 1, 2004||Apr 14, 2005||Grand Central Communications, Inc., A Delaware Corporation||Policy management in an interoperability network|
|US20050086297 *||Sep 27, 2004||Apr 21, 2005||Grand Central Communications, Inc.||Managing virtual business instances within a computer network|
|US20050091289 *||Oct 24, 2003||Apr 28, 2005||Microsoft Corporation||File sharing in P2P group shared spaces|
|US20050091595 *||Oct 24, 2003||Apr 28, 2005||Microsoft Corporation||Group shared spaces|
|US20050120246 *||Dec 1, 2004||Jun 2, 2005||Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.||Home network system and method therefor|
|US20050135622 *||Dec 18, 2003||Jun 23, 2005||Fors Chad M.||Upper layer security based on lower layer keying|
|US20050138210 *||Dec 19, 2003||Jun 23, 2005||Grand Central Communications, Inc.||Apparatus and methods for mediating messages|
|US20050223226 *||Apr 2, 2004||Oct 6, 2005||Microsoft Corporation||Authenticated exchange of public information using electronic mail|
|US20050234928 *||Mar 23, 2004||Oct 20, 2005||Grand Central Communications, Inc.||Synchronous interface to asynchronous processes|
|US20050238148 *||Jun 21, 2005||Oct 27, 2005||Behrouz Poustchi||Voice mail system, method and network devices|
|US20060020578 *||Jul 21, 2004||Jan 26, 2006||Rockwell Software, Inc.||Time stamp methods for unified plant model|
|US20060053289 *||Sep 9, 2004||Mar 9, 2006||International Business Machines Corporation||Peer-to-peer communications|
|US20060069771 *||Sep 29, 2004||Mar 30, 2006||International Business Machines Corporation||Method, system and program product for decentralized monitoring of server states within a cell of nodes|
|US20060074915 *||Dec 15, 2004||Apr 6, 2006||Grand Central Communications, Inc.||Multiple stakeholders for a single business process|
|US20060159269 *||Jan 20, 2005||Jul 20, 2006||Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.||Cryptographic system for resource starved CE device secure upgrade and re-configuration|
|US20060173960 *||Nov 12, 2004||Aug 3, 2006||Microsoft Corporation||Strategies for peer-to-peer instant messaging|
|US20060193474 *||Jan 31, 2006||Aug 31, 2006||Entriq Inc.||Content distribution using set of session keys|
|US20060212740 *||Mar 16, 2006||Sep 21, 2006||Jackson David B||Virtual Private Cluster|
|US20060288228 *||Aug 29, 2006||Dec 21, 2006||International Business Machines Corporation||Authenticated identity propagation and translation within a multiple computing unit environment|
|US20070025342 *||Jun 26, 2006||Feb 1, 2007||Gemini Mobile Technology, Inc.||Protocol optimization for wireless networks|
|US20070053382 *||Sep 6, 2005||Mar 8, 2007||Bevan Stephen J||Method, apparatus, signals, and medium for managing a transfer of data in a data network|
|US20070053516 *||Aug 19, 2005||Mar 8, 2007||Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc.||Symmetric key encryption system with synchronously updating expanded key|
|US20070078925 *||Sep 27, 2005||Apr 5, 2007||Research In Motion Limited||Porting an interface defining document between mobile device platforms|
|US20070198836 *||Jan 5, 2006||Aug 23, 2007||Nortel Networks Limited||Key negotiation and management for third party access to a secure communication session|
|US20070211651 *||Dec 28, 2006||Sep 13, 2007||Ebay Inc.||Peer-to-peer trading platform with roles-based transactions|
|US20070214249 *||Dec 28, 2006||Sep 13, 2007||Ebay Inc.||Peer-to-peer trading platform|
|US20070214250 *||Dec 28, 2006||Sep 13, 2007||Ebay Inc.||Peer-to-peer trading platform with search caching|
|US20070214259 *||Dec 28, 2006||Sep 13, 2007||Ebay Inc.||Peer-to-peer trading platform with relative reputation-based item search and buddy rating|
|US20080028055 *||Jan 5, 2006||Jan 31, 2008||Danny Dolev||Method and Apparatus for Managing Communications|
|US20080059283 *||Aug 31, 2006||Mar 6, 2008||Ebay Inc.||Method and system for opportunity distribution|
|US20080109362 *||Jan 11, 2008||May 8, 2008||Entriq Inc.||Method and system to digitally sign and deliver content in a geographically controlled manner via a network|
|US20080137856 *||Nov 29, 2007||Jun 12, 2008||Electronics & Telecommunications Research Institute||Method for generating indirect trust binding between peers in peer-to-peer network|
|US20080147854 *||Jan 24, 2008||Jun 19, 2008||Van Datta Glen||Violations in a peer-to-peer relay network|
|US20080155644 *||Dec 26, 2006||Jun 26, 2008||Motorola, Inc.||Method and system for communicating in a group of communication devices|
|US20080209051 *||Apr 21, 2008||Aug 28, 2008||Microsoft Corporation||Transport System for Instant Messaging|
|US20080209414 *||Feb 28, 2007||Aug 28, 2008||Red Hat, Inc.||Peer-to-peer software update distribution network|
|US20080282319 *||Nov 6, 2006||Nov 13, 2008||Koninklijke Philips Electronics, N.V.||System for Managing Access Control|
|US20090016524 *||Jun 27, 2008||Jan 15, 2009||Qualcomm Incorporated||Peer to peer identifiers|
|US20090028341 *||Mar 7, 2007||Jan 29, 2009||Canon Kabushiki Kaisha||Communication system, communication device and processing method therefor|
|US20090094572 *||Oct 9, 2007||Apr 9, 2009||Microsoft Corporation||Artifact sharing from a development environment|
|US20090296939 *||Feb 20, 2009||Dec 3, 2009||Marinus Struik||Local area network|
|US20090310531 *||Jun 10, 2009||Dec 17, 2009||Raytheon Company||Airborne Communication Network|
|US20100023766 *||Jul 13, 2009||Jan 28, 2010||International Business Machines Corporation||Computer Program Product and Computer System for Peer-to-Peer Communications|
|US20100023774 *||Jun 9, 2006||Jan 28, 2010||Natsume Matsuzaki||Information security device|
|US20100094939 *||Oct 9, 2008||Apr 15, 2010||Microsoft Corporation||Transient networks|
|US20100124902 *||Nov 19, 2008||May 20, 2010||General Instrument Corporation||Secure Data Exchange with Identity Information Exchange|
|US20100246827 *||Mar 27, 2009||Sep 30, 2010||Microsoft Corporation||User-specified sharing of data via policy and/or inference from a hierarchical cryptographic store|
|US20110093710 *||Oct 21, 2009||Apr 21, 2011||Microsoft Corporation||Low-latency peer session establishment|
|US20120057697 *||Sep 7, 2010||Mar 8, 2012||Nokia Corporation||Security of a multimedia stream|
|US20120089682 *||Oct 6, 2010||Apr 12, 2012||Qualcomm Incorporated||Methods and apparatus for supporting sharing of privileges in a peer to peer system|
|US20120197738 *||Dec 21, 2011||Aug 2, 2012||Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.||Method of Providing Content Assigned Identifier and ID Management Device|
|US20130243196 *||May 14, 2013||Sep 19, 2013||Canon Kabushiki Kaisha||Communication system, communication device and processing method therefor|
|US20140223169 *||Apr 4, 2014||Aug 7, 2014||Into Co., Ltd.||Tcp/ip-based communication system and associated methodology providing an enhanced transport layer protocol|
|US20160366123 *||Sep 25, 2015||Dec 15, 2016||Mcafee, Inc.||Device naming in an internet of things|
|WO2014092534A1||Dec 5, 2013||Jun 19, 2014||Mimos Berhad||A system and method for peer-to-peer entity authentication with nearest neighbours credential delegation|
|U.S. Classification||713/171, 709/225, 380/277, 713/156, 709/224, 713/175, 380/278|
|International Classification||G06F15/173, H04L9/00, H04L9/30, H04L9/08|
|Cooperative Classification||H04L2209/60, H04L9/0838, H04L9/0891|
|Feb 25, 2002||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:PABLA, KULDIP SINGH;YEAGER, WILLIAM J.;REEL/FRAME:012638/0432;SIGNING DATES FROM 20020213 TO 20020221
|Apr 14, 2010||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 4
|Mar 26, 2014||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 8
|Dec 16, 2015||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: ORACLE AMERICA, INC., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: MERGER AND CHANGE OF NAME;ASSIGNORS:ORACLE USA, INC.;SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC.;ORACLE AMERICA, INC.;REEL/FRAME:037302/0661
Effective date: 20100212